I really enjoyed the second round of presentations. They were much more time managed and informative without information overload. Like Dr. V said, we really took to heart what she said last time and am proud because of it. I was also really glad to see that people made their presentations more graphics friendly. Its weird how we’re in a graphics department and there are people here that aren’t very visually inclined. I liked what Dr. V said about how even though these presentations were over stuff that we have been using for years, its a good foundation to learn the basics of what we use on a daily basis and dont necessarily think about all the time even though we constantly use some of these things.
As someone who orders out a lot, I know; it’s terrible, I’ve had to use different websites to order food from. After using Jimmy Johns website, I really liked it and its easy to use. Now I can order something in about 2 minutes of clicking and deciding, which is really fast for ordering something online. But what if I dont want jimmy johns?
That’s easy, I use Hungry Boiler. You are immediately greeted with this
which is awesome. If you notice, there is also a place where you can login. This website is really awesome for getting food to people around campus. It lists all the different styles of restaurants by categories deals, delivery or takeout. Anyway, what made me choose this website for my good design, was the fact that I ordered a chinese meal in roughly 45 seconds. It took literally no time at all to order. And after using the rice cafe website to order my food once, earlier post, this made me extremely happy. (btw, rice cafe’s online order feature is still broken) Ever since that this lovely experience, I have used this website anytime I dont want Jimmy Johns. I highly recommend that you use it.
This is what a menu looks like on the website
You just click on what intersts you the most and pay for it. That easy. Use this site for food. Trust me. You wont regret it. Unless you can’t find the type of food or restaurants you’re looking for, then you’re SOL.
Webster, A., Feiner, S., MacIntyre, B., Massie, W., & Krueger, T. (1996, June). Augmented reality in architectural construction, inspection and renovation. InProc. ASCE Third Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering (pp. 913-919).
Through the use of Augmented reality, they can show hidden construction and information about certain architecture in a building.
They dont really go into description of a need for this technology. Its just super cool
Using a head mounted display system that interacts with the users vision and hearing, they programmed the prototype using a combination of C, C++ and CLIPS to run in Unix. They used a Reflection Technology Private Eye display for the head mounted display. This paper was written in the mid 90’s so the technology is very outdated by our standards today. They had to use multiple machines in order to get this system to work, as where now, it would take something like a phone to run this.
This paper was more about the possibilities of AR in an architectural setting. They have a lot of suggestions and, due to the limit of technology back then, could only scratch the surface of what AR can really do. That being said, their suggestions are good. They think that this technology has the capabilities for improving architectural construction, inspection and renovation by allowing maintenance workers to avoid hidden features such as buried infrastructure, electrical wiring, and structural elements as they make changes to buildings and outdoor environments.
In case you haven’t discovered by now, I really like Augmented Reality. I whole-heartedly believe that this is where the future lies for man kind. To have our technology seamlessly integrate into our daily lives through the use of visual and audio stimulation overlaid over the real world. (Pretty much like a HUD in most video games. Actually, not “kind of like”, EXACTLY like a HUD in video games, just the content will be different) What I thought of this paper is that it had a great glimpse into the future of what can come of this technology. It was written in 1996 and if I was this old in 1996 and read this paper I would have been ecstatic and really excited for the future. That being said, I didn’t think it read quite like papers I’m used to reading so it was hard to follow the normal analysis guidelines that I usually use. It was a fairly short paper and sounded almost redundant that’s expected since I read this 16 years after it was written. BUT, I still liked it.
Augmented Reality for Aircraft Maintenance Training and Operations Support
De Crescenzio, F., Fantini, M., Persiani, F., Di Stefano, L., Azzari, P., & Salti, S. (2011). Augmented reality for aircraft maintenance training and operations support. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 31(1), 96-101.
To provide an Augmented training program to decrease and maybe even eliminate human error in maintenance of aircraft.
- Chose a task to augment. They chose the oil-check sub-task to go with. It is part of the external series of check lists they need to go through pre-flight every time.
- Developed an AR interface based on an offline and an on-line process. In the offline process, they first acquired a reference image of the object they wanted to augment and extracted the local invariant features. The system would continuously process the camera’s video stream for the on-line process. It extracts the invariant features frame by frame and matches them with the reference image.
SIFT and SURF
SIFT – Scale-invariant feature transform
SURF – Speeded-up robust features
This was part of their method. They are the features used for extracting and matching the marker-less data. Both are very widely used methods but its usually either/or. They went with both to try and get the best results possible.
They found that it worked really well. The operators didn’t make unnecessary steps to complete the task. The error rate was relatively low. However, the amount of time on task was higher than without the AR. But that is due to a lack of training and familiarity with an AR system. The participants loved the system and gave it high reviews and praise. It was easy to use.
I chose this article because it is very similar to my experience. Basically they did what I did except a step further because they took the models with step by step representation and put it into a medium where the user could view it in real time over the actual task. Which is super cool. I really like/love AR because I really believe that is where the future lies for humanity and technology.
I imagine that they ran into the same problems that I did. In the article, it says that they didn’t have that many errors but had some major ones that could have been potentially really really bad. We had the same issue. The problem with simplifying the process of the maintenance through visual representation where you actually show the task they need to do, is that people will follow the visual instructions without hesitation and thought. So if you have a task where you need to depressurize something before releasing a valve, you can’t really show that other than in text form. But participants will ignore the text and follow the visual. There was a quote from John’s test that said “Its so easy I dont even need to think” That’s not a good thing. Not at all.
After discussing with Xin about Apple’s lovely design but horrible practicality of their wire products, I thought about looking up some serge protectors that would solve the problem.
It all started with this one:
It is a concept power strip (i’m pretty sure) that rotates and can change lengths, as you can see here, it comes apart and you can change the colors and how many plugs are in it and all that jazz
So this got me thinking. What others are there? There are actually some really cool ones that work well. Like this one
As you can see, the plugs are located not next to each other so they wouldn’t interfere with each other. It looks something like this when stuff is plugged in
Then there’s this T shaped surge protector, and in this picture you can even see there is a Mac converter plugged in with the rest at the same time!
There are many, many, MANY cool designs out there for Surge Protectors. But what I think the real problem is, Why do these makers or thinkers of the protectors have to fix the problems of the computer or electronic makers mistakes? Why can’t the designers of the product design a plug that will fit with each other on a normal Serge Protector? Because all of the ones I showed in this post aren’t available readily in stores or even exist in some cases. They’re just concepts because people are fed up with the bad design choices that their electronic makers thought was a good idea. But we still live with it though and we make due.
This weeks reading I found myself struggling through it. For some reason, it couldn’t get my attention. I found myself re-reading the same paragraph 3 or 4 times. That being said, I still went through it.
Things that stood out to me:
- Absence of Evidence is not evidence of absence
- Don’t high-five and pop the bubbly just yet
- Howarth et al.
Absence of Evidence is not evidence of absence
To me, this was the most important thing I read and the most interesting. It means exactly what it says. Just because there wasn’t evidence of a UX problem, doesn’t mean that the problem doesn’t exist. So go back and re-read all your collected data and make sure
Don’t high-five and pop the bubbly just yet
I liked this phrase, which is why i included it, but its referring to: Once you’re done testing, go through the data and everything while its still fresh in your mind. Dont wait and then it just becomes a summary of what you think happened.
Howarth et al
This was turning critical instances into UX problem instances. Basically putting your data and instances into UX problems that we’ve dealt with in the past so we can have something to relate to. Or at least that’s what I got out of it.
This one is really simple. Priority = (Importance/cost)*1000. And you go from there on setting the priority list
Common Industry Format. All of 17 talked about how you should present your evaluation. Basically it just told us industry standard and what to include and not include in evaluations. So a rubric of sorts.
This is referring to the UX words and acronyms we use all the time. I just like the word jargon 😀
Also, I’m putting in a picture of this duck because I want to confuse anyone that is just skimming over my post in Google Reader. Enjoy
Im sure you’ve all seen me wearing my big headphones.
These to be exact.
The reason I’m showing these this week is because multiple times a day; I pick these up, check the label on the side for “L” and put them on. I do this EVERY time I put them. This shouldn’t happen. There should be a clearer way to show which side is left and right. I have another pair of headphones, the SkullCandy Icon 2’s. They aren’t as comfy or at the same level of audio, but they did have something that I really liked.
See those red things off to the side? Those are little color things that allow you to change the color over the speaker part of your headphones. (Where the logo is on the headphones) I dont know if this was intentional on their part, but what I did with it was leave one color the default and change the other side. So basically one side was red, one was black. I did this so whenever I picked up my headphones, I immediately knew which side the speaker needed to go on. It was a quick and easy way for me to tell.
See that little bump? That’s supposed to be how I tell which side is left other than the little “L” and “R” that is hidden behind the chord in this picture. But you can see how big the font is in the picture. Its not very easy to tell. I just think it would help if they made it a little more obvious.